scrutiny: S.M.A.R.T failed
Hello, I have a problem with my scrutiny in docker, it recognizes my seagate disks and my nvme and WD disk.but the S.M.A.RT is failed for this last (WD) Has anyone already had this problem or has a solution. I am with a synology (dsm) .thanks
Expected behavior A clear and concise description of what you expected to happen.
Screenshots If applicable, add screenshots to help explain your problem.
Log Files "WD","model_name":"WD ***** [25A3","interface_type":"","interface_speed":"","serial_number":*******","firmware":"","rotational_speed":7200,"capacity":16000867106816,"form_factor":"","smart_support":false,"device_protocol":"SCSI","device_type":"scsi","smart_results":{"ID":31,"CreatedAt":"2021-08-03T13:35:11.029264788Z","UpdatedAt":"2021-08-03T13:35:11.029264788Z","DeletedAt":{"Time":"0001-01-01T00:00:00Z","Valid":false},"device_wwn":"2bgts00n","date":"2021-08-03T13:35:10Z","smart_status":"failed",
version: '3.5'
services:
scrutiny:
image: analogj/scrutiny
container_name: scrutiny
privileged: true
cap_add:
- SYS_RAWIO
- SYS_ADMIN
environment:
- SCRUTINY_API_ENDPOINT=http://localhost:8080
- DEBUG=true
- COLLECTOR_LOG_FILE=/tmp/collector.log
- SCRUTINY_LOG_FILE=/tmp/web.log
volumes:
- /volume1/docker/scrutiny/config:/config
- /run/udev:/run/udev:ro
ports:
- 8083:8080
devices:
# # example for forcing device type detection for a single disk
# - device: /dev/sda
# type: 'sat'
- /dev/sata1:/dev/sda
- /dev/sata2:/dev/sdb
- /dev/sata3:/dev/sdc
- /dev/sata4:/dev/sdd
- /dev/sata5:/dev/sde
- /dev/nvme0:/dev/sdf
- /dev/nvme1:/dev/sdg
- /dev/usb1:/dev/sdh
- /dev/usb2:/dev/sdi
labels:
- com.centurylinklabs.watchtower.enable=true
restart: unless-stopped
# in another terminal trigger the collector
docker exec scrutiny scrutiny-collector-metrics run
# then use docker cp to copy the log files out of the container.
docker cp scrutiny:/tmp/collector.log collector.log
docker cp scrutiny:/tmp/web.log web.log
About this issue
- Original URL
- State: closed
- Created 3 years ago
- Comments: 16 (13 by maintainers)
Commits related to this issue
- added additional tests from #187. Detected that the frontend was incorrectly classifying Scrutiny Failures as Warnings. Fixed. — committed to AnalogJ/scrutiny by AnalogJ 2 years ago
There’s 2 different mechanisms that Scrutiny uses to detect failures.
The first is simple SMART failures. If SMART thinks an attribute is in a failed state, Scrutiny will display it as failed as well.
The second is using BackBlaze failure data: https://www.backblaze.com/blog-smart-stats-2014-8.html If Scrutiny detects that an attribute corresponds with a high rate of failure using BackBlaze’s data, it will also mark that attribute (and disk) as failed.
hm. thats a problem. I’ll take a look.